Table 3 Bevacizumab plus chemotherapy versus chemotherapy
From: Targeted therapies in breast cancer: are heart and vessels also being targeted?
Study | Treatment | Line of therapy | Number of patients | Hypertension (grade 3 or 4) (%) | CHF NYHA class III or IV (%) | Thrombotic events (grade 3 or 4) (%) |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Miller et al. [110] | Capecitabine + bevacizumab versus capecitabine | 1, 2, 3 | 462 | G3: 17.9 versus 0.5 G4: 0 versus 0 | G3: 2.2 versus 0 G4: 0.5 versus 0 | Thrombotic event - general G3: 2.2. versus 0 G4: 0.5 versus 0 |
Miller et al. [58] | Paclitaxel + bevacizumab versus paclitaxel | 1 | 722 | G3: 14.5 versus 0 G4: 0.3 versus 0 P = 0.001 | LV dysfunction G3: 0.8 versus 0 G4: 0 versus 0.3 P = NS | Cerebrovascular ischemia G3: 0.8 versus 0 G4: 1.1 versus 0 P = 0.02 |
Miles et al. (AVADO) [73] | Docetaxel + bevacizumab (7.5 mg/kg) versus docetaxel + placebo | 1 | 736 | Grade 3 to 4: 0.8 versus 1.3 | Grade 3 to 4: 1.2 versus 0 | No G3-4 arterial events |
| Â | Docetaxel + bevacizumab (15 mg/kg) versus docetaxel+ placebo | Â | Â | Grade 3 to 4: 4.5 versus 1.3 | Grade 3 to 4: 0 versus 0 | Arterial events G3: 0 versus 0 G4: 0.8 versus 0 |
Robert et al. (RIBBON-1) [60] | Capecitabine plus bevacizumab versus capecitabine | 1 | 605 | Grade 3 to 4: 9.4 versus 1.0 | LV dysfunction Grade 3 to 4: 1.0 versus 0.5 | Venous events 4.8 versus 3.5 |
| Â | Taxane + bvacizmaversus taxane | Â | 405 | Grade 3 to 4: 8.9 versus 2.0 | LV dysfunction Grade 3 to 4: 2.0 versus 0 | Venous events 2.0 versus 4.9 |
| Â | Anthracycline + bevacizumb versus anthracycline | Â | 310 | Grade 3 to 4: 10 versus 0 | LV dysfunction Grade 3 to 4: 2.9 versus 0 | Venous events 2.9 versus 1.0 |
Brufsky et al. (RIBBON-2) [72] | Chemotherapya + bevacizumab versus bevacizumab | 2 | 684 | Grade 3 to 4: 9 versus 0.5 | LV dysfunction Grade 3 to 4: 0.9 versus 0 | Arterial events Grade 3 to 4: 0.7 versus 1.4 |